Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
-
- University of Michigan Law School (24)
- William & Mary Law School (19)
- University of Colorado Law School (9)
- Emory University School of Law (5)
- University of Richmond (5)
-
- University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School (4)
- American University Washington College of Law (3)
- Boston University School of Law (3)
- Cleveland State University (2)
- Columbia Law School (2)
- Georgia State University College of Law (2)
- Mercer University School of Law (2)
- New York Law School (2)
- Saint Louis University School of Law (2)
- University of Cincinnati College of Law (2)
- University of Georgia School of Law (2)
- University of Oklahoma College of Law (2)
- Vanderbilt University Law School (2)
- West Virginia University (2)
- Brigham Young University Law School (1)
- Brooklyn Law School (1)
- North Carolina Central University School of Law (1)
- Roger Williams University (1)
- Selected Works (1)
- Southern Methodist University (1)
- St. John's University School of Law (1)
- St. Mary's University (1)
- Texas A&M University School of Law (1)
- University of Arkansas at Little Rock William H. Bowen School of Law (1)
- University of Baltimore Law (1)
- Keyword
-
- United States Supreme Court (34)
- Supreme Court (12)
- Congress (7)
- Antitrust (6)
- Discrimination (6)
-
- Equal Protection Clause (5)
- Equal protection (5)
- Ashcroft v. Iqbal (4)
- Constitution (4)
- Employment discrimination (4)
- Federal courts (4)
- Pleadings (4)
- Supreme Court of the United States (4)
- Affirmative action (3)
- Authority (3)
- Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly (3)
- Civil rights (3)
- Constitutional Law (3)
- Courts (3)
- Eighth Amendment (3)
- Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (3)
- Graham v. Florida (3)
- History (3)
- Judges (3)
- Minorities (3)
- Parole (3)
- Race and law (3)
- Ricci v. DeStefano (3)
- Sentencing (3)
- Sovereignty (3)
- Publication
-
- Articles (13)
- Supreme Court Preview (10)
- Faculty Scholarship (9)
- Publications (9)
- All Faculty Scholarship (7)
-
- Faculty Publications (7)
- Faculty Articles (6)
- University of Richmond Law Review (5)
- Michigan Law Review (4)
- Michigan Law Review First Impressions (4)
- Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals (3)
- American Indian Law Review (2)
- Faculty Articles and Other Publications (2)
- Faculty Publications By Year (2)
- Georgia Law Review (2)
- Law Faculty Scholarship (2)
- Michigan Journal of Gender & Law (2)
- Other Publications (2)
- Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications (2)
- All Maxine Goodman Levin School of Urban Affairs Publications (1)
- Amicus Briefs (1)
- Book Chapters (1)
- Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters (1)
- Journal Articles (1)
- Kentucky Law Journal (1)
- Law Faculty Articles and Essays (1)
- McGeorge Law Review (1)
- Mercer Law Review (1)
- Michigan Journal of Race and Law (1)
- Miller W. Shealy Jr. (1)
- Publication Type
Articles 91 - 112 of 112
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Future Of Disparate Impact, Richard A. Primus
The Future Of Disparate Impact, Richard A. Primus
Articles
The Supreme Court's decision in Ricci v. DeStefano foregrounded the question of whether Title VIl's disparate impact standard conflicts with equal protection. This Article shows that there are three ways to read Ricci, one of which is likely fatal to disparate impact doctrine but the other two of which are not.
The Causation Standard In Federal Employment Law: Gross V. Fbl Financial Services, Inc., And The Unfulfilled Promise Of The Civil Rights Act Of 1991, Michael C. Harper
The Causation Standard In Federal Employment Law: Gross V. Fbl Financial Services, Inc., And The Unfulfilled Promise Of The Civil Rights Act Of 1991, Michael C. Harper
Faculty Scholarship
This article analyzes and recommends a Congressional response to the Supreme Court’s 2009 decision in Gross v. FBL Financial Services, Inc.. The article places the Gross decision’s choice of a causation standard for disparate treatment causes of action in historical context by comparing that choice with that made by Congress for Title VII in § 107 of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, and criticizes the Court’s activist refusal to follow its own Title VII precedent. Stressing the lower courts’ misinterpretation of § 107, both before and after the Court’s own interpretation of this section in 2003 in Desert Palace, …
The Pleading Problem In Antitrust Cases And Beyond, Herbert J. Hovenkamp
The Pleading Problem In Antitrust Cases And Beyond, Herbert J. Hovenkamp
All Faculty Scholarship
In its Twombly decision the Supreme Court held that an antitrust complaint failed because its allegations did not include enough “factual matter” to justify proceeding to discovery. Two years later the Court extended this new pleading standard to federal complaints generally. Twombly’s broad language has led to a broad rewriting of federal pleading doctrine.
Naked market division conspiracies such as the one pled in Twombly must be kept secret because antitrust enforcers will prosecute them when they are detected. This inherent secrecy, which the Supreme Court did not discuss, has dire consequences for pleading if too much factual specificity …
Of Visible Race-Consciousness And Institutional Role: Equal Protection And Disparate Impact After Ricci And Inclusive Communities, Richard A. Primus
Of Visible Race-Consciousness And Institutional Role: Equal Protection And Disparate Impact After Ricci And Inclusive Communities, Richard A. Primus
Book Chapters
Six years ago, Ricci v. DeStefano foregrounded the possibility that statutory disparate-impact standards like the one in Title VIl might be on a collision course with the Fourteenth Amendment's Equal Protection Clause. For many observers, it was a radically new possibility. Until that point, disparate-impact doctrine had usually been understood as an ally of equal protection rather than as a potentially conflicting aspect of the law. But between the 1970s and the beginning of the present century, equal protection doctrine became more individualistic and less tolerant of race-conscious actions intended to redress inherited racial hierarchies. Those developments put equal protection …
Clashing Visions Of A "Living" Constitution: Of Opportunists And Obligationists, William W. Van Alstyne
Clashing Visions Of A "Living" Constitution: Of Opportunists And Obligationists, William W. Van Alstyne
Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.
The Supreme Court, Social Psychology, And Group Formation, Neal Devins, William Federspiel
The Supreme Court, Social Psychology, And Group Formation, Neal Devins, William Federspiel
Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.
The Story Of Bob Jones University V. United States: Race, Religion, And Congress' Extraordinary Acquiescence, Olatunde C.A. Johnson
The Story Of Bob Jones University V. United States: Race, Religion, And Congress' Extraordinary Acquiescence, Olatunde C.A. Johnson
Faculty Scholarship
On May 25, 1983, the Supreme Court ruled 8-1 that the United States Internal Revenue Service (IRS) had authority to deny tax-exempt status to Bob Jones University, Goldsboro Christian School, and other private and religious schools with racially discriminatory educational policies. The Court relied on the statute’s broad purpose and placed significant weight on Congress’ failure to enact legislation to overturn the IRS policy. A complete account of the legislative history, provided here, both supports and undercuts the Court’s opinion. More importantly, this story provides an account of the dynamic interaction among a Supreme Court critical of racial integration, a …
Pleading With Congress To Resist The Urge To Overrule Twombly And Iqbal, Michael R. Huston
Pleading With Congress To Resist The Urge To Overrule Twombly And Iqbal, Michael R. Huston
Michigan Law Review
In Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly and Ashcroft v. Iqbal, the Supreme Court changed the rhetoric of the federal pleading system. Those decisions have been decried by members of the bar, scholars, and legislators as judicial activism and a rewriting of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Such criticism has led members of both houses of Congress to introduce legislation to overrule the decisions and return to some variation of the "notice pleading" regime that existed before Twombly. This Note argues that both of the current proposals to overrule Twombly and Iqbal should be rejected. Although the bills take different …
Article I, Article Iii, And The Limits Of Enumeration, Gil Seinfeld
Article I, Article Iii, And The Limits Of Enumeration, Gil Seinfeld
Articles
Article I, Section 8 and Article Ill, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution deploy parallel strategies for constraining the power of the federal government. They enumerate powers that the national legislature and judiciary, respectively, are permitted to exercise and thereby implicitly prohibit these two branches of government from exercising powers not enumerated. According to conventional thinking, this strategy has failed in connection with Article I and succeeded in connection with Article III. That is, it is widely acknowledged that Congress routinely exercises powers that are difficult to square with the Article I enumeration; but it is commonly thought that the …
Immigration As Invasion: Sovereignty, Security, And The Origins Of The Federal Immigration Power, Matthew Lindsay
Immigration As Invasion: Sovereignty, Security, And The Origins Of The Federal Immigration Power, Matthew Lindsay
All Faculty Scholarship
This Article offers a new interpretation of the modern federal immigration power. At the end of the nineteenth century, the Supreme Court and Congress fundamentally transformed the federal government’s authority to regulate immigration, from a species of commercial regulation firmly grounded in Congress’ commerce authority, into a power that was unmoored from the Constitution, derived from the nation’s “inherent sovereignty,” and subject to extraordinary judicial deference. This framework, which is commonly referred to as the “plenary power doctrine,” has stood for more than a century as an anomaly within American public law. The principal legal and rhetorical rationale for the …
Taking Cues From Congress: Judicial Review, Congressional Authorization, And The Expansion Of Presidential Power, David H. Moore
Taking Cues From Congress: Judicial Review, Congressional Authorization, And The Expansion Of Presidential Power, David H. Moore
Faculty Scholarship
In evaluating whether presidential acts are constitutional, the Supreme Court often takes its cues from Congress. Under the Court's two most prominent approaches for gauging presidential power-Justice Jackson's tripartite framework and the historical gloss on executive power-congressional approval of presidential conduct produces a finding of constitutionality. Yet courts and commentators have failed to recognize that congressional authorization may result from a failure of checks and balances. Congress may transfer power to the President against institutional interest for a variety of reasons. This key insight calls into question the Court's reflexive reliance on congressional authorization. Through this reliance, the Court overlooks …
Reestablishing Actual Impartiality As The Fundamental Value Of Judicial Ethics: Lessons From "Big Judge Davis", Raymond J. Mckoski
Reestablishing Actual Impartiality As The Fundamental Value Of Judicial Ethics: Lessons From "Big Judge Davis", Raymond J. Mckoski
Kentucky Law Journal
No abstract provided.
New Pleading, New Discovery, Scott Dodson
New Pleading, New Discovery, Scott Dodson
Michigan Law Review
Pleading in federal court has a new narrative. The old narrative was one of notice, with the goal of broad access to the civil justice system. New Pleading, after the landmark Supreme Court cases of Twombly and Iqbal, is focused on factual sufficiency, with the purpose of screening out meritless cases that otherwise might impose discovery costs on defendants. The problem with New Pleading is that factual insufficiency often is a poor proxy for meritlessness. Some plaintifs lack sufficient factual knowledge of the elements of their claims not because the claims lack merit but because the information they need is …
Litigation Strategies For Dealing With The Indigent Defense Crisis, Eve Brensike Primus
Litigation Strategies For Dealing With The Indigent Defense Crisis, Eve Brensike Primus
Articles
The indigent defense delivery system in the United States is in a state of crisis. Public defenders routinely handle well over 1,000 cases a year, more than three times the number of cases that the American Bar Association says one attorney can handle effectively. As a result, many defendants sit in jail for months before even speaking to their court-appointed lawyers. And when defendants do meet their attorneys, they are often disappointed to learn that these lawyers are too overwhelmed to provide adequate representation. With public defenders or assigned counsel representing more than 80% of criminal defendants nationwide, the indigent …
Justice Stevens' Temperance, Jamal Greene
Justice Stevens' Temperance, Jamal Greene
Faculty Scholarship
On the last opinion day of the last of his 35 Terms on the Supreme Court, Justice John Paul Stevens issued his valedictory opinion, a 57-page dissent in McDonald v. City of Chicago. Justice Stevens laid out an expansive vision of constitutional interpretation that Justice Alito aptly called "eloquent" in his plurality opinion. Not one for sentimental farewells, Justice Scalia was less generous: "Justice Stevens' approach," he wrote in the last line of his concurring opinion," puts democracy in peril."
Reflections On Section 5 Of The Ftc Act And The Ftc's Case Against Intel, Daniel A. Crane
Reflections On Section 5 Of The Ftc Act And The Ftc's Case Against Intel, Daniel A. Crane
Articles
The Federal Trade Commission’s (“FTC’s”) unprecedented enforcement action against Intel raises profound issues concerning the scope of the FTC’s powers to give a construction to Section 5 of the FTC Act that goes beyond the substantive reach of the Sherman Act. While I have urged the FTC to assert such independence from the Sherman Act, this is the wrong case to make a break. Indeed, if anything, Intel poses a risk of seriously setting back the development of an independent Section 5 power by provoking a hostile appellate court to rebuke the FTC’s effort and cabin the FTC’s powers in …
Citizens United And The Corporate Form, Reuven S. Avi-Yonah
Citizens United And The Corporate Form, Reuven S. Avi-Yonah
Articles
In Citizens United vs. FEC, the Supreme Court struck down a Federal statute banning direct corporate expenditures on political campaigns. The decision has been widely criticized and praised as a matter of First Amendment law. But it is also interesting as another step in the evolution of our legal views of the corporation. This Article argues that by viewing Citizens Unitedthrough the prism of theories about the corporate form, it is possible to see that the majority and the dissent departed from previous Supreme Court jurisprudence on the First Amendment rights of corporations. It is also possible to then predict …
Public Consensus As Constitutional Authority, Richard A. Primus
Public Consensus As Constitutional Authority, Richard A. Primus
Articles
Barry Friedman's new book The Will of the People attempts to dissolve constitutional law's countermajoritariand ifficulty by showing that, in practice,t he Supreme Court does only what the public will tolerate. His account succeeds if "the countermajoritarian difficulty" refers to the threat that courts will run the country in ways that contravene majority preference, but not if the "the countermajoritarian difficulty" refers to the need to explain the legitimate sources of judicial authority in cases where decisions do contravene majority preference. Friedman's book does not pursue the second possibility, and may suggest that doing so is unimportant, in part because …
Constitutional Expectations, Richard A. Primus
Constitutional Expectations, Richard A. Primus
Articles
The inauguration of Barack Obama was marred by one of the smallest constitutional crises in American history. As we all remember, the President did not quite recite his oath as it appears in the Constitution. The error bothered enough people that the White House redid the ceremony a day later, taking care to get the constitutional text exactly right. Or that, at least, is what everyone thinks happened. What actually happened is more interesting. The second time through, the President again departed from the Constitution's text. But the second time, nobody minded. Or even noticed. In that unremarked feature of …
Engineering The Endgame, Ellen D. Katz
Engineering The Endgame, Ellen D. Katz
Michigan Law Review
This Article explores what happens to longstanding remedies for past racial discrimination as conditions change. It shows that Congress and the Supreme Court have responded quite differently to changed conditions when they evaluate such remedies. Congress has generally opted to stay the course, while the Court has been more inclined to view change as cause to terminate a remedy. The Article argues that these very different responses share a defining flaw, namely, they treat existing remedies as fixed until they are terminated. As a result, remedies are either scrapped prematurely or left stagnant despite dramatically changed conditions. The Article seeks …
What Does Graham Mean In Michigan?, Kimberly A. Thomas
What Does Graham Mean In Michigan?, Kimberly A. Thomas
Articles
In Graham v. Florida, the United States Supreme Court held that life without parole could not be imposed on a juvenile offender for a nonhomicide crime.1 In this context, the Graham Court extensively discussed the diminished culpability of juvenile criminal defendants, as compared to adults. The Court relied on current scientific research regarding adolescent development and neuroscience. While the narrowest holding of Graham has little impact in Michigan, the science it relies on, and the potential broader implications for adolescents in Michigan, are significant.
When The Supreme Court Came To Michigan, Leonard M. Niehoff
When The Supreme Court Came To Michigan, Leonard M. Niehoff
Articles
It is an arcane and curious chapter in the history of the federal courts. Under the terms of the Judiciary Act of 1789, the members of the Supreme Court of the United States were obligated to travel around the country and hear cases that were brought before the lower courts in their assigned circuits. This resulted in what the justices condemned as a "painful and improper situation. "